The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Thought last year was amazing? Can't wait to see what is in store for us this year?
Well round about nothing new will be appearing... at least not until Christmas... from Nintendo... I should imagine. Nintendo and their fantastic army of 2nd party monsters will be working as hard as possible in creating some of THE best titles for upcoming system codenamed: N5.
Nintendo cunningly declared a delay in a large selection of their first and second party titles last year, Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, a game Dennis Dyack, head of Silicon Knights, swore would be ready for Christmast, was pushed back. Could Mr. Dyack really be a liar? Far from it, in fact the game was ready to ship by the end of the year but Nintendo opted to leave it for the Easter market.
Miyamoto has barley mentioned his baby sequel, the frankly fantastic Pikmin 2, the reason? He's finished it, it's done and dusted. The reason for it's spring delay is basically to fill up time. After contacting third parties Nintendo would have been aware that the first half of 2004 would be deserted. Japanese mega hit Harvest Moon would appear as would EA's James Bond title... but that is a poor show.
In order to fill up European and American release schedules games such as Pikmin 2, Donkey Konga, Mario Golf (European), Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Kirby's Air Ride and Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes were delayed to help make 2004 a fantastic year. Naturally third party smashes with Harvest Moon, Beyond Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, Code Veronica, Everything or Nothing and Sonic Heroes will make this apparent lack hardly noticable (despite their being 3 AAA titles amongst the big list).
But it is the latter of 2004 that shows the most interesting results. Here we have first party Metroid Prime 2 for America and Europe being the big Christmas game whilst the Japanese have Zelda Wind Waker 2 (although never count out Mario). Other first party titles are in fact small GBA-GC connection games such as the special Zelda pack. Expect Mario Tennis and Mario Party 6 to appear to. It is up to the third parties to help the second half of 2004 for Nintendo to look good... can they do it?
Easily.
Killer 7 and Resident Evil 4 from Capcom is a great start, Starfox 2 from Namco will continue the great trend, other titles from Konami will start appearing, Geist will hopefully show up (unless they're scared away by X-boxes big guns Halo 2, Half Life 2 and Doom 3 this year) and not to mention the Pokemon games (expect Colleseium to kick a$$). And they're just the exclusive third party games don't forget some undeniable Ubi-soft classics... maybe XIII 2.
Naturally that is to far away to predict brilliantly. The BIG thing for Nintendo this year will be that product they are hyping up, could this really save the big N from an ever loosening hold?
What will we see at E3, and if it isn't the next generation of Nintendo consoles is there going to be a Spaceworld this year?
"2004 the year Nintendo fight back" - Satouri Iwati.
Well round about nothing new will be appearing... at least not until Christmas... from Nintendo... I should imagine. Nintendo and their fantastic army of 2nd party monsters will be working as hard as possible in creating some of THE best titles for upcoming system codenamed: N5.
Nintendo cunningly declared a delay in a large selection of their first and second party titles last year, Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, a game Dennis Dyack, head of Silicon Knights, swore would be ready for Christmast, was pushed back. Could Mr. Dyack really be a liar? Far from it, in fact the game was ready to ship by the end of the year but Nintendo opted to leave it for the Easter market.
Miyamoto has barley mentioned his baby sequel, the frankly fantastic Pikmin 2, the reason? He's finished it, it's done and dusted. The reason for it's spring delay is basically to fill up time. After contacting third parties Nintendo would have been aware that the first half of 2004 would be deserted. Japanese mega hit Harvest Moon would appear as would EA's James Bond title... but that is a poor show.
In order to fill up European and American release schedules games such as Pikmin 2, Donkey Konga, Mario Golf (European), Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, Kirby's Air Ride and Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes were delayed to help make 2004 a fantastic year. Naturally third party smashes with Harvest Moon, Beyond Good and Evil, Prince of Persia, Code Veronica, Everything or Nothing and Sonic Heroes will make this apparent lack hardly noticable (despite their being 3 AAA titles amongst the big list).
But it is the latter of 2004 that shows the most interesting results. Here we have first party Metroid Prime 2 for America and Europe being the big Christmas game whilst the Japanese have Zelda Wind Waker 2 (although never count out Mario). Other first party titles are in fact small GBA-GC connection games such as the special Zelda pack. Expect Mario Tennis and Mario Party 6 to appear to. It is up to the third parties to help the second half of 2004 for Nintendo to look good... can they do it?
Easily.
Killer 7 and Resident Evil 4 from Capcom is a great start, Starfox 2 from Namco will continue the great trend, other titles from Konami will start appearing, Geist will hopefully show up (unless they're scared away by X-boxes big guns Halo 2, Half Life 2 and Doom 3 this year) and not to mention the Pokemon games (expect Colleseium to kick a$$). And they're just the exclusive third party games don't forget some undeniable Ubi-soft classics... maybe XIII 2.
Naturally that is to far away to predict brilliantly. The BIG thing for Nintendo this year will be that product they are hyping up, could this really save the big N from an ever loosening hold?
What will we see at E3, and if it isn't the next generation of Nintendo consoles is there going to be a Spaceworld this year?
"2004 the year Nintendo fight back" - Satouri Iwati.
Page:
Notorious Biggles wrote:
>
> EA not signing was nothing to do with the online gaming, they don't
> do online with the Xbox or GC but still sell enough units on both of
> them. Sega played the whole Dreamcast project very conservatively
> from a business stand point.
EA did not like SEGA's bussiness stratagy... I read a statement from an ex-SEGA employee who stated they played too many risks with the Dreamcast.
> Advertisement is also what made Sony the main force in the games
> industry today. And Xbox Live has shown that online gaming can be
> brilliant if done properly.
Yes but it can also have the opposite effect... AKA SEGA.
Sega were the hard core games company. Disagree if you want,
> but I think you're too young to remember. Niche titles... like
> Ikaruga and Rez? Both DC first. Radiant Silvergun.. I can't be
> bothered naming anymore.
Yes they were... they're not now... but Nintendo are hardly casual either... it is the most hardcore company on the market.
> How many of the 10 million GC owners would you call proper hard core
> Nintendo fans, as in the sort who would never buy a PS2? 5 million?
> That isn't enough to survive. Sega have shown that. What keeps them
> going is the success of the GBA, and that is going to be under threat
> more than ever with the PSP. An exclusive Resident Evil series will
> not change that.
No it isn't. The success of the GBA is so great Sony will not defeat it with a £200, battery guzzling system that offer the same as Nintendo's next system.
> Nintendo also attract the younger audience... Nintendo have ALWAYS
> done this. Sony allowed Adults to play games and that has become the
> bigger market... but Nintendo have stuck with the same market from
> the very beginning and that market still means Nintendo can rake in
> profits.
>
> True. But there is more money in the Grand Theft Auto franchise than
> there is in Nintendo's seemingly kiddy franchises. Kids want the
> "cool" older people's games.
>
> You comment on the Gamecube rise being artificial, but that was the
> first price drop from Nintendo since the launch... Microsoft have
> had
> 3... could their success be based on artificial price cutting?
>
> Not really. The Xbox was simply overpriced to begin with. But the
> Xbox sales have remained fairly static year on year despite the price
> cut, which means that the sales of the console were not radically
> affected by a price cut. The GC's went up by huge amounts, which I
> doubt will be sustained next year. When you sell 11% of all units
> EVER sold in one month after a price cut then that means it has had a
> big BIG impact.
As did the release of Tales of Symphonia, Zelda, Metroid and Mario Kart. Not just the price cut.
> The GC is only $80 in the States... that is ~£45. I have bought
> a tie that cost more than that. Sure the Xbox is cheap as well, but
> it isn't seemingly flushing money away.
Microsoft are making more of a loss on each system than Nintendo... who of course used cheaper components, Nintendo also make a killing software wise.
> If they are not as strong as MS and Sony does that mean they are
> weaker than them? Of course it does. It might not make any difference
> to the management, but that shows it to be bad management. I am
> pretty sure that the shareholders are not too happy with losing 30%
> of their investment in the past year. And they are the real bosses.
60% of shares are owned by Nintendo themselves, the other 40% are distributed mainly between Nintendo employees.
>
> EA not signing was nothing to do with the online gaming, they don't
> do online with the Xbox or GC but still sell enough units on both of
> them. Sega played the whole Dreamcast project very conservatively
> from a business stand point.
EA did not like SEGA's bussiness stratagy... I read a statement from an ex-SEGA employee who stated they played too many risks with the Dreamcast.
> Advertisement is also what made Sony the main force in the games
> industry today. And Xbox Live has shown that online gaming can be
> brilliant if done properly.
Yes but it can also have the opposite effect... AKA SEGA.
Sega were the hard core games company. Disagree if you want,
> but I think you're too young to remember. Niche titles... like
> Ikaruga and Rez? Both DC first. Radiant Silvergun.. I can't be
> bothered naming anymore.
Yes they were... they're not now... but Nintendo are hardly casual either... it is the most hardcore company on the market.
> How many of the 10 million GC owners would you call proper hard core
> Nintendo fans, as in the sort who would never buy a PS2? 5 million?
> That isn't enough to survive. Sega have shown that. What keeps them
> going is the success of the GBA, and that is going to be under threat
> more than ever with the PSP. An exclusive Resident Evil series will
> not change that.
No it isn't. The success of the GBA is so great Sony will not defeat it with a £200, battery guzzling system that offer the same as Nintendo's next system.
> Nintendo also attract the younger audience... Nintendo have ALWAYS
> done this. Sony allowed Adults to play games and that has become the
> bigger market... but Nintendo have stuck with the same market from
> the very beginning and that market still means Nintendo can rake in
> profits.
>
> True. But there is more money in the Grand Theft Auto franchise than
> there is in Nintendo's seemingly kiddy franchises. Kids want the
> "cool" older people's games.
>
> You comment on the Gamecube rise being artificial, but that was the
> first price drop from Nintendo since the launch... Microsoft have
> had
> 3... could their success be based on artificial price cutting?
>
> Not really. The Xbox was simply overpriced to begin with. But the
> Xbox sales have remained fairly static year on year despite the price
> cut, which means that the sales of the console were not radically
> affected by a price cut. The GC's went up by huge amounts, which I
> doubt will be sustained next year. When you sell 11% of all units
> EVER sold in one month after a price cut then that means it has had a
> big BIG impact.
As did the release of Tales of Symphonia, Zelda, Metroid and Mario Kart. Not just the price cut.
> The GC is only $80 in the States... that is ~£45. I have bought
> a tie that cost more than that. Sure the Xbox is cheap as well, but
> it isn't seemingly flushing money away.
Microsoft are making more of a loss on each system than Nintendo... who of course used cheaper components, Nintendo also make a killing software wise.
> If they are not as strong as MS and Sony does that mean they are
> weaker than them? Of course it does. It might not make any difference
> to the management, but that shows it to be bad management. I am
> pretty sure that the shareholders are not too happy with losing 30%
> of their investment in the past year. And they are the real bosses.
60% of shares are owned by Nintendo themselves, the other 40% are distributed mainly between Nintendo employees.
Auf deutsch wrote:
> It's not the first price drop
>
> The Gamecube price dropped a few weeks before release for some
> reason.
>
> Plus, I'm pretty sure it dropped somewhere inbetween
No and No it dropped BEFORE release to compete with the X-box.
This was the only price drop after launch.
> It's not the first price drop
>
> The Gamecube price dropped a few weeks before release for some
> reason.
>
> Plus, I'm pretty sure it dropped somewhere inbetween
No and No it dropped BEFORE release to compete with the X-box.
This was the only price drop after launch.
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> Other than Zelda, the other 2 really weren't 'that' good.
Which of course is a matter of opinion.
> Hardly amazing, I could buy Soul Calibur 2 on any of the other
> consoles and Resi 0, while god was nothing we hadn't seen before.
They were 2 examples... my mind had gone blank I should have also mentioned Product Number: 03, Super Monkey Ball 2, Billy Hatcher and Viewtiful Joe.
> Sonic is nothing short of rubbish these days and don't even get me
> started on the connectivity nonsense.
Ah but popular. Tilt it may not be a great money making idea but Pacman Vs and the Zelda connectivity disc is nothing short of amazing fun.
> I'm still seeing a very large amount of big 3rd party developers
> straight turning down the Cube or just denying its existance.
Indeed you are... but compare this to the N64... go on.
1: Mario Kart was the best Mario Kart game yet, perfect Example as to why Nintendo personify fun. Metroid Prime is a dareing and fantastic leap into new territories, Wario World was good few hours fun, 1080 is the coolest Nintendo game ever made, Mario Party 5 is the best in the series and F Zero is fantastic.
2: Are you sure it isn't that your own tastes have developed and changed and not Nintendo's ability?
3: Pokemon Stadium 3 or Colleseium is by far a stupid game... the at last Pokemon RPG mode that will make the game stay atop the Japanese charts (at least) for several months.
Dringo.
> Other than Zelda, the other 2 really weren't 'that' good.
Which of course is a matter of opinion.
> Hardly amazing, I could buy Soul Calibur 2 on any of the other
> consoles and Resi 0, while god was nothing we hadn't seen before.
They were 2 examples... my mind had gone blank I should have also mentioned Product Number: 03, Super Monkey Ball 2, Billy Hatcher and Viewtiful Joe.
> Sonic is nothing short of rubbish these days and don't even get me
> started on the connectivity nonsense.
Ah but popular. Tilt it may not be a great money making idea but Pacman Vs and the Zelda connectivity disc is nothing short of amazing fun.
> I'm still seeing a very large amount of big 3rd party developers
> straight turning down the Cube or just denying its existance.
Indeed you are... but compare this to the N64... go on.
1: Mario Kart was the best Mario Kart game yet, perfect Example as to why Nintendo personify fun. Metroid Prime is a dareing and fantastic leap into new territories, Wario World was good few hours fun, 1080 is the coolest Nintendo game ever made, Mario Party 5 is the best in the series and F Zero is fantastic.
2: Are you sure it isn't that your own tastes have developed and changed and not Nintendo's ability?
3: Pokemon Stadium 3 or Colleseium is by far a stupid game... the at last Pokemon RPG mode that will make the game stay atop the Japanese charts (at least) for several months.
Dringo.
enough.
You are all horribly incorrect.
You are all horribly incorrect.
Dringo wrote:
>
> As for Tilt.... erm so a year where Nintendo released Zelda, Metroid
> and Mario Kart,
Other than Zelda, the other 2 really weren't 'that' good.
attracting some of the best ever third party support
> they've ever had, resident evil 0, soul calibur 2...
Hardly amazing, I could buy Soul Calibur 2 on any of the other consoles and Resi 0, while god was nothing we hadn't seen before.
grabbed the
> Sonic series.... created GBA connectivity properly,
Sonic is nothing short of rubbish these days and don't even get me started on the connectivity nonsense.
improved third
> party ties across the board,
I'm still seeing a very large amount of big 3rd party developers straight turning down the Cube or just denying its existance.
took number one place in america and
> Japan several times and created some of the best games ever....
Sales figures mean very little to me and the best games ever? Other than Wind Waker I saw nothing in 2003 from Nintendo that really made me say "DAMN! that's good". Even Wind Waker was just anohter Zelda game, sure it was excellent but it hardly brought the series forward did it?
> wasn't a good year for you?
Not really, no. You keep telling yourself that 2003 was amazing, I'll just sit back and wait for Nintendo to actually pull their fingers out and show us what they're really capable of. Oh and that doesn't mean making more carbon copy sequels or stupid Pokemon Stadium games.
>
> As for Tilt.... erm so a year where Nintendo released Zelda, Metroid
> and Mario Kart,
Other than Zelda, the other 2 really weren't 'that' good.
attracting some of the best ever third party support
> they've ever had, resident evil 0, soul calibur 2...
Hardly amazing, I could buy Soul Calibur 2 on any of the other consoles and Resi 0, while god was nothing we hadn't seen before.
grabbed the
> Sonic series.... created GBA connectivity properly,
Sonic is nothing short of rubbish these days and don't even get me started on the connectivity nonsense.
improved third
> party ties across the board,
I'm still seeing a very large amount of big 3rd party developers straight turning down the Cube or just denying its existance.
took number one place in america and
> Japan several times and created some of the best games ever....
Sales figures mean very little to me and the best games ever? Other than Wind Waker I saw nothing in 2003 from Nintendo that really made me say "DAMN! that's good". Even Wind Waker was just anohter Zelda game, sure it was excellent but it hardly brought the series forward did it?
> wasn't a good year for you?
Not really, no. You keep telling yourself that 2003 was amazing, I'll just sit back and wait for Nintendo to actually pull their fingers out and show us what they're really capable of. Oh and that doesn't mean making more carbon copy sequels or stupid Pokemon Stadium games.
Lou Role wrote:
> Now that was a good reason to own a GC last year, that game is
> fantastic. If Nintendo can come up with more corkers like that, then
> things will improve.
You kind of had to read what Biggles said about Sega being perceived as the hardcore games company because of the titles they came up with for their machines - largely exclusive titles.
Maverick is trying to argue that this Nintendo hardcore element can keep Nintendo going no matter what basically, but I'm saying that this same bunch of people tend to only buy first party nintendo stuff and not the perceived hardcore titles from elsewhere, like Ikaruga, Skies of Arcadia etc
> Now that was a good reason to own a GC last year, that game is
> fantastic. If Nintendo can come up with more corkers like that, then
> things will improve.
You kind of had to read what Biggles said about Sega being perceived as the hardcore games company because of the titles they came up with for their machines - largely exclusive titles.
Maverick is trying to argue that this Nintendo hardcore element can keep Nintendo going no matter what basically, but I'm saying that this same bunch of people tend to only buy first party nintendo stuff and not the perceived hardcore titles from elsewhere, like Ikaruga, Skies of Arcadia etc
It wasn't a Nintendo game. It was originally a Dreamcast game.
Developed by Treasure, it was the sequel to Radiant Silvergun.
Developed by Treasure, it was the sequel to Radiant Silvergun.
Yukikaze wrote:
> Adding to what Biggles has said, Ikaruga (bl**dy excellent game) got a
> PAL release on the Gamecube and these supposed hordes of hardcore
> gamers on the Gamecube largely ignored it.
Now that was a good reason to own a GC last year, that game is fantastic. If Nintendo can come up with more corkers like that, then things will improve.
> Adding to what Biggles has said, Ikaruga (bl**dy excellent game) got a
> PAL release on the Gamecube and these supposed hordes of hardcore
> gamers on the Gamecube largely ignored it.
Now that was a good reason to own a GC last year, that game is fantastic. If Nintendo can come up with more corkers like that, then things will improve.
Adding to what Biggles has said, Ikaruga (bl**dy excellent game) got a PAL relese on the Gamecube and these supposed hordes of hardcore gamers on the Gamecube largely ignored it. Skies of Arcadia, despite good reviews, barely sold.
Yet Nintendo toss such as Luigi's Mansion sold by the bucketload (and yes it was toss because anyone with a brain could roar through it in the first sitting if they could hold their interest in the game that long).
There are scores of other examples which make little sense - dropping the GC price tag drastically (£70) before the console even launched was insane because it caused many people too run a mile from the machine - making modems then only releasing one game for them which, contrary to what Nintendo said they believe in (free online play) had a monthly charge - releasing the $19.99 Resident Evil reissues in the UK at £29.99 - and on and on....
Yet Nintendo toss such as Luigi's Mansion sold by the bucketload (and yes it was toss because anyone with a brain could roar through it in the first sitting if they could hold their interest in the game that long).
There are scores of other examples which make little sense - dropping the GC price tag drastically (£70) before the console even launched was insane because it caused many people too run a mile from the machine - making modems then only releasing one game for them which, contrary to what Nintendo said they believe in (free online play) had a monthly charge - releasing the $19.99 Resident Evil reissues in the UK at £29.99 - and on and on....
Dringo wrote:
> SEGA failed because SEGA took risks... they had a massive
> advertisement campaign, they put so much money into the Dreamcast...
> they set up a complex online service.
It was actually the simplest online service of any console, ever. Even netlink on the Saturn was way more complex. They only put normal amounts of money into the DC, it was losing money on the Mega CD, 32 X and Saturn that left them in a precarious financial position.
>
> The advertisement campaign backfired, Online gaming did not take off
> and therefore EA did not sign aboard... The risks SEGA meant the
> fantastic console nose-dived.
EA not signing was nothing to do with the online gaming, they don't do online with the Xbox or GC but still sell enough units on both of them. Sega played the whole Dreamcast project very conservatively from a business stand point.
>
> Nintendo don't take massive risks. Nintendo don't advertise massively
> because if done wrong they could do a SEGA, they are reluctant to
> lunge into Online gaming because it has proven problamatic in the
> past.
>
Advertisement is also what made Sony the main force in the games industry today. And Xbox Live has shown that online gaming can be brilliant if done properly.
> Nintendo are known as the hardcore company in the gaming world,
> Gamers who own a Nintendo console go for the niche title, the smaller
> unknown things... they are hardcore gamers. Hence Viewtiful Joe being
> a Gamecube exclusive. Nintendo have a MASSIVE fan base, slightly
> damage by the sale of RARE but increased with the exclusivity of the
> Resident Evil series. Nintendo have a hardcore fan base and this is a
> fan base that just doesn't get affected by the same things as casual
> gamers, advertising a sony game does not make me want a PS2... not at
> all and I'm not the only one.
Actually Sega were the hard core games company. Disagree if you want, but I think you're too young to remember. Niche titles... like Ikaruga and Rez? Both DC first. Radiant Silvergun.. I can't be bothered naming anymore.
How many of the 10 million GC owners would you call proper hard core Nintendo fans, as in the sort who would never buy a PS2? 5 million? That isn't enough to survive. Sega have shown that. What keeps them going is the success of the GBA, and that is going to be under threat more than ever with the PSP. An exclusive Resident Evil series will not change that.
>
> Nintendo also attract the younger audience... Nintendo have ALWAYS
> done this. Sony allowed Adults to play games and that has become the
> bigger market... but Nintendo have stuck with the same market from
> the very beginning and that market still means Nintendo can rake in
> profits.
True. But there is more money in the Grand Theft Auto franchise than there is in Nintendo's seemingly kiddy franchises. Kids want the "cool" older people's games.
>
> You comment on the Gamecube rise being artificial, but that was the
> first price drop from Nintendo since the launch... Microsoft have had
> 3... could their success be based on artificial price cutting?
Not really. The Xbox was simply overpriced to begin with. But the Xbox sales have remained fairly static year on year despite the price cut, which means that the sales of the console were not radically affected by a price cut. The GC's went up by huge amounts, which I doubt will be sustained next year. When you sell 11% of all units EVER sold in one month after a price cut then that means it has had a big BIG impact.
The GC is only $80 in the States... that is ~£45. I have bought a tie that cost more than that. Sure the Xbox is cheap as well, but it isn't seemingly flushing money away.
> Nintendo are not weak they are just not as strong as the
> opposition... but in the mind of the most stubbon company ever to
> have graced this earth... that doesn't mean a thing.
If they are not as strong as MS and Sony does that mean they are weaker than them? Of course it does. It might not make any difference to the management, but that shows it to be bad management. I am pretty sure that the shareholders are not too happy with losing 30% of their investment in the past year. And they are the real bosses.
> SEGA failed because SEGA took risks... they had a massive
> advertisement campaign, they put so much money into the Dreamcast...
> they set up a complex online service.
It was actually the simplest online service of any console, ever. Even netlink on the Saturn was way more complex. They only put normal amounts of money into the DC, it was losing money on the Mega CD, 32 X and Saturn that left them in a precarious financial position.
>
> The advertisement campaign backfired, Online gaming did not take off
> and therefore EA did not sign aboard... The risks SEGA meant the
> fantastic console nose-dived.
EA not signing was nothing to do with the online gaming, they don't do online with the Xbox or GC but still sell enough units on both of them. Sega played the whole Dreamcast project very conservatively from a business stand point.
>
> Nintendo don't take massive risks. Nintendo don't advertise massively
> because if done wrong they could do a SEGA, they are reluctant to
> lunge into Online gaming because it has proven problamatic in the
> past.
>
Advertisement is also what made Sony the main force in the games industry today. And Xbox Live has shown that online gaming can be brilliant if done properly.
> Nintendo are known as the hardcore company in the gaming world,
> Gamers who own a Nintendo console go for the niche title, the smaller
> unknown things... they are hardcore gamers. Hence Viewtiful Joe being
> a Gamecube exclusive. Nintendo have a MASSIVE fan base, slightly
> damage by the sale of RARE but increased with the exclusivity of the
> Resident Evil series. Nintendo have a hardcore fan base and this is a
> fan base that just doesn't get affected by the same things as casual
> gamers, advertising a sony game does not make me want a PS2... not at
> all and I'm not the only one.
Actually Sega were the hard core games company. Disagree if you want, but I think you're too young to remember. Niche titles... like Ikaruga and Rez? Both DC first. Radiant Silvergun.. I can't be bothered naming anymore.
How many of the 10 million GC owners would you call proper hard core Nintendo fans, as in the sort who would never buy a PS2? 5 million? That isn't enough to survive. Sega have shown that. What keeps them going is the success of the GBA, and that is going to be under threat more than ever with the PSP. An exclusive Resident Evil series will not change that.
>
> Nintendo also attract the younger audience... Nintendo have ALWAYS
> done this. Sony allowed Adults to play games and that has become the
> bigger market... but Nintendo have stuck with the same market from
> the very beginning and that market still means Nintendo can rake in
> profits.
True. But there is more money in the Grand Theft Auto franchise than there is in Nintendo's seemingly kiddy franchises. Kids want the "cool" older people's games.
>
> You comment on the Gamecube rise being artificial, but that was the
> first price drop from Nintendo since the launch... Microsoft have had
> 3... could their success be based on artificial price cutting?
Not really. The Xbox was simply overpriced to begin with. But the Xbox sales have remained fairly static year on year despite the price cut, which means that the sales of the console were not radically affected by a price cut. The GC's went up by huge amounts, which I doubt will be sustained next year. When you sell 11% of all units EVER sold in one month after a price cut then that means it has had a big BIG impact.
The GC is only $80 in the States... that is ~£45. I have bought a tie that cost more than that. Sure the Xbox is cheap as well, but it isn't seemingly flushing money away.
> Nintendo are not weak they are just not as strong as the
> opposition... but in the mind of the most stubbon company ever to
> have graced this earth... that doesn't mean a thing.
If they are not as strong as MS and Sony does that mean they are weaker than them? Of course it does. It might not make any difference to the management, but that shows it to be bad management. I am pretty sure that the shareholders are not too happy with losing 30% of their investment in the past year. And they are the real bosses.
Page: